Parker, Rice and Foster
The question of Dave Parker vs. Jim Rice and George Foster is simply an issue of close comparison between similar players who have similar values at the same time. This chart compares their Win Shares year by year:
|
Parker
|
Rice
|
Foster
|
1969
|
|
|
0
|
1970
|
|
|
1
|
1971
|
|
|
12
|
1972
|
|
|
1
|
1973
|
4
|
|
2
|
1974
|
6
|
1
|
9
|
1975
|
26
|
20
|
21
|
1976
|
23
|
17
|
25
|
1977
|
33
|
26
|
32
|
1978
|
37
|
36
|
30
|
1979
|
31
|
28
|
22
|
1980
|
17
|
16
|
23
|
1981
|
6
|
15
|
24
|
1982
|
7
|
21
|
12
|
1983
|
12
|
24
|
14
|
1984
|
17
|
17
|
18
|
1985
|
29
|
14
|
17
|
1986
|
20
|
28
|
6
|
1987
|
13
|
8
|
|
1988
|
10
|
9
|
|
1989
|
15
|
2
|
|
1990
|
15
|
|
|
1991
|
6
|
|
|
Totals
|
327
|
282
|
269
|
While the players are of similar value—Rice and Parker were Most Valuable Players in 1978, Foster in 1977—but while the players are of similar value, Parker has more career value (327 vs. 282 and 269), more value in a five-year peak period (150 vs. 127 and 132) and more value in a three-year peak period (101 vs. 90 and 87). Parker and Rice’s three-year and five-year peaks are in the same seasons, and Parker is credited with more Win Shares every season.
While this may not be a definitive answer, I will note that Baseball Reference-WAR reaches essentially the same conclusion with regard to the peak seasons, although a different conclusion with regard to the career total. These are the Baseball-Reference WAR for the three players:
|
Parker
|
Rice
|
Foster
|
1969
|
|
|
0
|
1970
|
|
|
0.1
|
1971
|
|
|
1.8
|
1972
|
|
|
-0.6
|
1973
|
1.1
|
|
0.6
|
1974
|
0.3
|
0
|
1
|
1975
|
6.3
|
3
|
4.8
|
1976
|
3.7
|
2.4
|
5.9
|
1977
|
7.4
|
5.2
|
8.4
|
1978
|
7
|
7.6
|
4.9
|
1979
|
6.7
|
6.4
|
5.1
|
1980
|
1.6
|
2
|
4.1
|
1981
|
0.1
|
2.5
|
3.7
|
1982
|
0.6
|
3
|
-0.6
|
1983
|
0.2
|
5.7
|
0.8
|
1984
|
1
|
2.5
|
2.3
|
1985
|
4.7
|
1.9
|
1.7
|
1986
|
0.3
|
5.6
|
0.2
|
1987
|
-1.2
|
0.2
|
|
1988
|
0.2
|
0.5
|
|
1989
|
0.3
|
-0.7
|
|
1990
|
1.1
|
|
|
1991
|
-1
|
|
|
Totals
|
40.4
|
47.8
|
44.2
|
WAR shows Parker as weaker than Rice or Foster because of the weaknesses of his off-peak seasons, but agrees that Parker was stronger than the other two when they were at their peak. Parker has a five-year peak of 31.1, Foster of 29.1, Rice of 24.6, all of them in the same years. Parker has a three-year peak of 21.1 WAR, while Foster and Rice both have three-year peaks of 19.2.
"Superstardom" rests on peak seasons, of course, so at this point you should have a complete understanding of why Parker shows up as a Superstar and the other two do not. I’ll finish the math just because I’m the kind of guy who finishes the math, but at this point you should have it. When we move from Win Shares to Adjusted Win Shares, the ratios between them don’t really change:
|
Parker
|
|
Rice
|
|
Foster
|
1969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
0.0
|
1970
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
0.9
|
1971
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
12.0
|
1972
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
1.1
|
1973
|
4
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
1.9
|
1974
|
6
|
6.4
|
|
1
|
1.1
|
|
9
|
9.0
|
1975
|
26
|
28.0
|
|
20
|
23.2
|
|
21
|
22.0
|
1976
|
23
|
25.4
|
|
17
|
17.0
|
|
25
|
27.0
|
1977
|
33
|
36.0
|
|
26
|
28.0
|
|
32
|
42.1
|
1978
|
37
|
51.0
|
|
36
|
48.0
|
|
30
|
29.2
|
1979
|
31
|
32.0
|
|
28
|
30.0
|
|
22
|
21.7
|
1980
|
17
|
18.0
|
|
16
|
16.0
|
|
23
|
21.6
|
1981
|
6
|
6.0
|
|
15
|
15.9
|
|
24
|
24.0
|
1982
|
7
|
7.0
|
|
21
|
22.0
|
|
12
|
12.0
|
1983
|
12
|
12.7
|
|
24
|
26.0
|
|
14
|
14.0
|
1984
|
17
|
18.0
|
|
17
|
18.0
|
|
18
|
18.0
|
1985
|
29
|
31.0
|
|
14
|
15.0
|
|
17
|
17.0
|
1986
|
20
|
21.0
|
|
28
|
31.7
|
|
6
|
6.0
|
1987
|
13
|
13.0
|
|
8
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
1988
|
10
|
10.0
|
|
9
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
1989
|
15
|
15.0
|
|
2
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
1990
|
15
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1991
|
6
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
327
|
357
|
0
|
282
|
311
|
|
269
|
279
|
And when you combine the Adjusted Win Shares into the Multi-Year Totals, the Running Score, Parker of course comes out ahead:
|
Parker
|
|
Rice
|
|
Foster
|
1969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
1970
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
0.9
|
3.8
|
1971
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
12.0
|
52.2
|
1972
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
1.1
|
61.6
|
1973
|
4
|
4.2
|
17.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
1.9
|
59.8
|
1974
|
6
|
6.4
|
44.4
|
|
1
|
1.1
|
4.2
|
|
9
|
9.0
|
77.9
|
1975
|
26
|
28.0
|
156.5
|
|
20
|
23.2
|
97.5
|
|
21
|
22.0
|
156.2
|
1976
|
23
|
25.4
|
260.9
|
|
17
|
17.0
|
175.9
|
|
25
|
27.0
|
257.8
|
1977
|
33
|
36.0
|
384.5
|
|
26
|
28.0
|
278.3
|
|
32
|
42.1
|
404.2
|
1978
|
37
|
51.0
|
539.8
|
|
36
|
48.0
|
437.5
|
|
30
|
29.2
|
478.5
|
1979
|
31
|
32.0
|
600.7
|
|
28
|
30.0
|
515.3
|
|
22
|
21.7
|
483.9
|
1980
|
17
|
18.0
|
559.5
|
|
16
|
16.0
|
491.5
|
|
23
|
21.6
|
459.1
|
1981
|
6
|
6.0
|
438.9
|
|
15
|
15.9
|
430.3
|
|
24
|
24.0
|
445.5
|
1982
|
7
|
7.0
|
330.2
|
|
21
|
22.0
|
402.6
|
|
12
|
12.0
|
393.9
|
1983
|
12
|
12.7
|
275.6
|
|
24
|
26.0
|
413.5
|
|
14
|
14.0
|
348.2
|
1984
|
17
|
18.0
|
275.4
|
|
17
|
18.0
|
402.4
|
|
18
|
18.0
|
327.9
|
1985
|
29
|
31.0
|
343.5
|
|
14
|
15.0
|
371.5
|
|
17
|
17.0
|
321.3
|
1986
|
20
|
21.0
|
377.0
|
|
28
|
31.7
|
405.0
|
|
6
|
6.0
|
275.2
|
1987
|
13
|
13.0
|
358.7
|
|
8
|
8.0
|
361.5
|
|
|
|
|
1988
|
10
|
10.0
|
309.4
|
|
9
|
9.0
|
307.8
|
|
|
|
|
1989
|
15
|
15.0
|
284.8
|
|
2
|
2.1
|
225.3
|
|
|
|
|
1990
|
15
|
15.9
|
280.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1991
|
6
|
6.4
|
246.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All three players reach their peak Running Score at the same time, at the end of their peak periods in 1979. We consider 530.00 to be a Superstar Level. Parker reaches a Peak of 600, while Rice Rises to 515, and Foster Festers at 484.
I used 530 as the cutoff for "what is a Superstar?", but of course there is nothing inevitable about this; you can describe Matt Chapman as a Superstar if you insist on it. It is not at all unreasonable to say that we should use a somewhat more tolerant cutoff for Superstardom, and Rice would be considered a Superstar if we did. I just set it where I set it because I was trying to set "Superstar Seasons" at about 11-12% of "Star Seasons".